Happenings of December 26

[CircuitGuy]

Someone posted recently that we cannot glean any info from the tone of PR in the 911 call. I agree. They also wrote that they can't hear the change of tone or background conversation in the call available to the public. I agree.

I am very confused, though, by what she said in the call. She says her daughter has been kidnapped and frantically asked them to "hurry". Any reaction is possible if she found a RN, but this one doesn't make sense to me. She could have mentioned, "we can afford the money; should we go along with their demands?" She could have asked them to investigate this undercover. (I don't care if she hadn't read the whole note. Someone supposedly invaded her home without anyone hearing!) She could have asked what they should do next?

It's possible she was afraid the perpetrators were lurking about and wanted protection for the rest of the family. It's possible she just wanted to turn over responsibility entirely to an authority figure, i.e.. the police; although this seems inconsistent with her not working with the police in the days after.

Someone said JR might have not wanted her to call but not known how to stop her. He could have hung up the phone and told her "let's first try giving them the money; calling the cops could get her killed" even if he hadn't read the note. It's common sense that there's some risk to calling the police or not calling them. His having an opinion wouldn't make him look guilty.

I am open minded, not making any judgements from a brief call, BUT the call sounds completely out of step with what the Ramsey's say was happening. "Hurry, hurry, hurry," rings totally false. Why was she so eager to have the police present? Does anyone think the main tenor of the call, disregarding possible background stuff that I don't hear in the public tape, makes any sense at all?

 

[Chrishope]

Someone posted recently that we cannot glean any info from the tone of PR in the 911 call. I agree. They also wrote that they can't hear the change of tone or background conversation in the call available to the public. I agree.

I am very confused, though, by what she said in the call. She says her daughter has been kidnapped and frantically asked them to "hurry". Any reaction is possible if she found a RN, but this one doesn't make sense to me. She could have mentioned, "we can afford the money; should we go along with their demands?" She could have asked them to investigate this undercover. (I don't care if she hadn't read the whole note. Someone supposedly invaded her home without anyone hearing!) She could have asked what they should do next?

My take is that the sooner the police arrive the sooner they can start looking for JB. She could ask the 911 operator what to do, but she couldn't actually do anything until the police arrive so why ask the operator? Those decisions are better made after consulting a detective than consulting an operator?

It's possible she was afraid the perpetrators were lurking about and wanted protection for the rest of the family. It's possible she just wanted to turn over responsibility entirely to an authority figure, i.e.. the police; although this seems inconsistent with her not working with the police in the days after.

Agreed.

Someone said JR might have not wanted her to call but not known how to stop her. He could have hung up the phone and told her "let's first try giving them the money; calling the cops could get her killed" even if he hadn't read the note. It's common sense that there's some risk to calling the police or not calling them. His having an opinion wouldn't make him look guilty.

3 buttons. 9-1-1. Once the 3rd button is pushed the 911 call is complete and no one can stop it. If JR had hung up the phone, the 911 operator would have called back. If they didn't answer, the cops would be dispatched. If they did answer they'd have to assure the operator that they accidentally dialed 911 and that everything was ok -which is possible, but if the operator suspects anything is wrong, the cops will be sent anyway. JR had to convince her before she dialed.

Another point is this - he couldn't control her every minute. He couldn't keep her away from any and every phone. If she decided they needed professionals involved she could make the call anytime she was out of JRs reach.

I am open minded, not making any judgements from a brief call, BUT the call sounds completely out of step with what the Ramsey's say was happening. "Hurry, hurry, hurry," rings totally false. Why was she so eager to have the police present? Does anyone think the main tenor of the call, disregarding possible background stuff that I don't hear in the public tape, makes any sense at all?

Again, it's an emergency situation in PR's mind, so "hurry" makes sense to me. She needs the police to start finding her daughter. They can't do that over the phone.

I may not be as objective as someone who has recently become interested in the case (though years ago I was PDI, so I guess at least I'm able to change my mind) but it rings true to me. The general tenor, as I see it, is -"Hurry, get here, start searching for my daughter." PR gives the info the operator asks for. She gives a very brief description -she's blonde, she's 6 years old.

It's always interesting that different people have different perspectives and different ideas of what rings true. If it doesn't ring true to you, then it doesn't ring true.

 

[Chrishope]

I was offering the possibility that the Samsonite suitcase was intentionally placed in the train room to carry JBR's body and the blanket/gown/doll/garrote out of the house.

My guess is that there was a plan at some point to remove the body before the police arrived.

That's what I meant by:

Police to JR: Can you explain why you were spotted leaving the residence at 6:00 am carrying a suitcase?

JR to Police: Yes, I was off to pick up the money and didn't have an adequate size attaché [as instructed in the RN].

Sorry for not being clear.

I see. I hadn't thought of that. Sorry for being slow on the uptake.


I think you are right that there was a plan to get rid of the body before the police were called in.

I once calculated how big the stack of money would be - I don't recall the numbers now, but basically the money would fit in a larger type brown paper lunch bag, so his normal attache was probably more than adequate. But I doubt most people would know that w/o sitting down and doing the calculations. It sounds like a lot of money, and most people would assume it would take up a lot of space. An American bill is .0043 inches thick, if you are interested. A stack of 1000 bills would be 4.3 inches tall. Of course that's with new bills, machine stacked, with little air space between the bills. Old bills, hand stacked, would take up a lot more room. Still, it should all fit in his brief case.

Still it's an interesting thought, it might have provided him with the excuse to take the suitcase.

 

[Chelly]

Would the body of a six-year-old fit into that samsonite?

 

[Nom de plume]

:twocents:

Mr. Ramsey: Listen Carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We respect your business, but not the country it serves.
At this time, we have your daughter in our possession. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.

You will withdraw $118,000 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills.

(An amount not to hurt the Ramseys financially if money had to be destroyed – e.g. bank/police recorded the serial numbers.)

Make sure that you bring an adequate size attaché to the bank.

(Explanation if JR was seen leaving the house with a hard, Samsonite suitcase.)

When you get home, you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 a.m. tomorrow to instruct you on delivery.
The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested.

(Providing ample time for JR to discard the contents of the suitcase.)

If we monitor you getting the money early we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence and earlier pickup of your daughter.

(Explanation if JR was seen leaving the house well before any bank opens.)

Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for a proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as police or F.B.I. will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in way marked or tampered with, she dies. You can try to deceive us, but be warned we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics.

(Explanation why the kidnappers never made contact.)

You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to outsmart us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% of getting her back. You and your family are under constant scrutiny, as well as the authorities.
Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us, John. Use that good, Southern common sense of yours. It's up to you now John! Victory! S.B.T.C.

Excellent analysis WATN!! IMO there's a good reason why this RN is so long. First I think it was intended to scare PR into not calling LE. It also provides an explanation for everything JR would have done had she not called 911. It also looks to me like he was trying to set PR up with some of the wording he chose. I've always suspected he intended to get her out of the house in the suitcase, but hadn't put that together with "an adequate size attaché". DUH!!

 

[Chrishope]

Would the body of a six-year-old fit into that samsonite?

It's possible, but difficult. Somewhere on the WWW is a diagram of how the body could be contorted to fit in the suitcase. I never bookmarked it, now I wish I had.

What's interesting is that most of us saw "adequate size attache" as giving an excuse to be out in a remote area with an attache. WATN has realized that it might give an excuse for using something larger. Even if the suitcase wasn't part ot the plan (and we'll never really know) this is a clever way of interpreting the RN language.

 

[WhereAreTheyNow]

Someone posted recently that we cannot glean any info from the tone of PR in the 911 call. I agree. They also wrote that they can't hear the change of tone or background conversation in the call available to the public. I agree.

I think its important to note that the 911 operator originally noticed the 'change in tone' and, according to the passages I posted from Kolar's book, the end of the call made a big impression on the operator. I guess you are saying that she misinterpreted what she heard. For whatever reason, Kolar felt it credible enough to fully discuss in his book.

I personally have no opinion either way because we can't listen to the master recording from Aerospace.

 

[CircuitGuy]

I think its important to note that the 911 operator originally noticed the 'change in tone' and, according to the passages I posted from Kolar's book, the end of the call made a big impression on the operator. I guess you are saying that she misinterpreted what she heard. For whatever reason, Kolar felt it credible enough to fully discuss in his book.

I personally have no opinion either way because we can't listen to the master recording from Aerospace.

I did not mean to imply that the operator misinterpreted. I haven't heard the enhanced tape. It's also possible the operator's headset provided higher quality audio than the tape and she may have heard things not captured even on the enhanced tape.

I'm only saying a) I could hear nothing suspicious in tone or the background noise on the publicly available recording and b) the content of what PR is saying (not the tone) are much more suspicious to me.

 

[UKGuy]

It's possible, but difficult. Somewhere on the WWW is a diagram of how the body could be contorted to fit in the suitcase. I never bookmarked it, now I wish I had.

What's interesting is that most of us saw "adequate size attache" as giving an excuse to be out in a remote area with an attache. WATN has realized that it might give an excuse for using something larger. Even if the suitcase wasn't part ot the plan (and we'll never really know) this is a clever way of interpreting the RN language.

Chrishope,
Sure is, and you can expect to be quoted on this. Its all nonsense of course, lets makeup a RDI theory, oh PR misinterpreted the RN, JR had another interpretation, gee whiz Lieutenant Columbo Was that Ransom Note not staged? It sure was.

DocG's theory comprehensively fails to explain the forensic evidence. What it does do is take forensic evidence that suits its final conclusion, then interprets that selectively.


.

 

[UKGuy]

Someone posted recently that we cannot glean any info from the tone of PR in the 911 call. I agree. They also wrote that they can't hear the change of tone or background conversation in the call available to the public. I agree.

I am very confused, though, by what she said in the call. She says her daughter has been kidnapped and frantically asked them to "hurry". Any reaction is possible if she found a RN, but this one doesn't make sense to me. She could have mentioned, "we can afford the money; should we go along with their demands?" She could have asked them to investigate this undercover. (I don't care if she hadn't read the whole note. Someone supposedly invaded her home without anyone hearing!) She could have asked what they should do next?

It's possible she was afraid the perpetrators were lurking about and wanted protection for the rest of the family. It's possible she just wanted to turn over responsibility entirely to an authority figure, i.e.. the police; although this seems inconsistent with her not working with the police in the days after.

Someone said JR might have not wanted her to call but not known how to stop her. He could have hung up the phone and told her "let's first try giving them the money; calling the cops could get her killed" even if he hadn't read the note. It's common sense that there's some risk to calling the police or not calling them. His having an opinion wouldn't make him look guilty.

I am open minded, not making any judgements from a brief call, BUT the call sounds completely out of step with what the Ramsey's say was happening. "Hurry, hurry, hurry," rings totally false. Why was she so eager to have the police present? Does anyone think the main tenor of the call, disregarding possible background stuff that I don't hear in the public tape, makes any sense at all?

CircuitGuy,
Its an insult to members intelligence to suggest JR staged a homicide crime-scene, drafted a ransom-note, dropped it on the stairs then retired to bed?

That PR did not follow JR's implicit instructions is either evidence of his inate ignorance or it never really happened according to DocG's interpretation.

I think the DocG theorists know this already but they rationalise it away with various explanations.

DocG is correct in parts, but in other parts he is wildly wrong, so wrong that he sends people down the wrong tracks, where they reside for months if not years on end.

If there was a Columbo style movie with JonBenet as subject then DocG's theory would be ideal.

It would start with JR dumping JonBenet somewhere then moving on to him picking up the cash in an attache case, then on to the 911 call etc.

Towards the end Columbo would say to JR, One last question sir, you know that kidnapper, how do you think he left through that basement door and left the chair in front of it, behind him. Just how was that possible Mr Ramsey?

.

 

[UKGuy]

I suspect that he would not have taken the Samsonite but instead his own attache. But he's going to be driving around in a remote area and he's going to have to leave the attache when he makes the phoney drop. I suspect he'd have to destroy most, if not all, of he money.

Chrishope,
Yup, yup, and its all slowly becoming more complicated with little explanation as to how things might pan out.

You have left out left out the most important item of course, now why might that be?


.

 

[UKGuy]

Does this make sense?

Make sure that you bring an adequate size hard, Samsonite suitcase to the bank.

Q: Can you explain why you were spotted leaving the residence at 6:00 am carrying a suitcase?

A: Yes, I was off to pick up the money and didn't have an adequate size attaché.

Was that forthcoming?

WhereAreTheyNow,
Yes it was, thank you. Now on the attache case v. the samsonite suitcase, may I offer another perspective.

If I were JR intending to dump JonBenet outdoors:

1. I would wrap her in a blanket.

2. I would place her in a plastic bin-liner.

3. I would place this in the boot, or back seat, of my car.

4. I would drive the car to a remote location, dump the bin-liner and hope nobody will ever discover it until decomposition has taken it natural course, because JR knows he will be under surveilance for ever afterwards.

Now because JR has access to his car via the connecting door to his garage he need never be seen in public with any kind of attache or samsonsite case!

If you pay attention to the forensic evidence in the JonBenet case you will realize DocG's theory does not explain what happened, its not even close, but it is populist, because it fingers JR and all the fabricated, staged evidence which nobody can disprove, because its fake!


.

 

[questfortrue]

An interesting plan, UKGuy! :seeya: But there are also some holes in the plan. If JR had left in the middle of the night, someone might see him or hear the car. He can’t very well just put her in the car and wait until the police leave, same dilemma as leaving her in the WC. Someone might look in his car – worse incrimination than the WC. The suitcase might very well have been “under consideration” that night, in order to stash her in a crawl space, and, if successfully hidden, perhaps the suitcase with their other belongings could have been put into the private plane. Or, who knows, maybe they did think they could risk it, and place the suitcase in the car and if questioned by the police have explained they didn’t have a large attaché and were taking the empty suitcase to the bank.

MK said years later that there are dozens of pieces of evidence that the public is not privy to. The suitcase just seems to me as though it was one idea, which may have been evaluated and discarded in the middle of the night. Yes, the crime scene and RN are fabricated. However, behind the fabrication is a mind or two, trying to figure out how to disguise all of this. Illogical as it seems to others looking at it years later, unlocking their logic, and connecting the real evidence left behind is all we got here. (Guess we have their statements, too, but by the time those were provided, they’d been lawyered and coached.) All MHO.

 

[UKGuy]

An interesting plan, UKGuy! :seeya: But there are also some holes in the plan. If JR had left in the middle of the night, someone might see him or hear the car. He can’t very well just put her in the car and wait until the police leave, same dilemma as leaving her in the WC. Someone might look in his car – worse incrimination than the WC. The suitcase might very well have been “under consideration” that night, in order to stash her in a crawl space, and, if successfully hidden, perhaps the suitcase with their other belongings could have been put into the private plane. Or, who knows, maybe they did think they could risk it, and place the suitcase in the car and if questioned by the police have explained they didn’t have a large attaché and were taking the empty suitcase to the bank.

MK said years later that there are dozens of pieces of evidence that the public is not privy to. The suitcase just seems to me as though it was one idea, which may have been evaluated and discarded in the middle of the night. Yes, the crime scene and RN are fabricated. However, behind the fabrication is a mind or two, trying to figure out how to disguise all of this. Illogical as it seems to others looking at it years later, unlocking their logic, and connecting the real evidence left behind is all we got here. (Guess we have their statements, too, but by the time those were provided, they’d been lawyered and coached.) All MHO.

questfortrue,
Patently my interpretation is not intended as unique, simply another view. JR could have placed JonBenet anywhere within his car in the garage, and nobody would be privy to this. He could then drive off to any location and dump JonBenet.

So all this talk about the attache case etc, is superfluous, nice stuff if you suscribe to DocG, otherwise obvious nonsense.


.

 

[DeeDee249]

We've gone over the body/suitcase thing many times. Her livor mortis pattern proves that she was not placed anywhere else. And rigor mortis would have prevented her from being folded into ANYTHING as it progressed. Had she been put in the suitcase first, there would be TWO livor patterns and had rigor developed while she was still there, she would not have been able to be straightened out without breaking rigor. It was not broken when she was found. You are all welcome to play out any scenario about suitcases, freezers, etc. but science will always win. She was never in the suitcase after death. She was placed on her back, legs straight, head cocked to the right, within 10-20 minutes of death. And that is how she remained until she was found.

 

[CircuitGuy]

Why remove some but not all?

To answer your question. It was not intended that nobody should ever see the forensic items, just that they are not in immediate public view. Partially Opened Christmas gifts and a bloodstained Nightgown lying about might result in some awkward questions, with respect to an abduction scenario. Bear in mind the R's deliberately called friends over, so they knew there would be lots of eyeballs surveying the house.

Most of the theories agree its RDI, and its simply a matter of interpretating the forensic evidence. e.g. I interpret the RN as a means to explain why JonBenet has been moved, whereas DocG interprets it as a means to move JonBenet from the house. My basic theory is consistent with most other theories, including DocG's, its just that they have not noticed yet.

If they called friends and police, who they knew would search the house, isn't putting things in the WC the same as putting them in immediate public view?

Why would partially-opened holiday gifts raise questions? The presence of partially-opened holiday gifts around the winter holidays seems perfectly normal to me. What could they possibly have to do with a murder?

Your suggestion is the killers (possibly one of the Ramsey's) moved her body for a reason and the RN is simply a crude artifice to explain away why she was moved. If that is true, what is the real reason they moved her body?

 

[azwriter]

Just trying to figure out the meaning/purpose of a 3-page RN.

I can share my idea of the purpose for a three-page ransom letter.
There's a dead little girl's body in your basement. The only reasonable way to remove that body is to call the cops. But you have to have a cover. That's the reason for the detailed letter.

The letter acted as a blueprint, an explaination of why the Ramsey's daughter's dead body was in the basement. And it points the cops in the direction of an outside source as the people who killed the girl.

But in reality, the letter fell short as a ransom note. Within the note are strict details on how to prepare the money, down to the amount, denominations and what to put it in.

But notice how little instruction is given in the letter as to how to exchange the money for the daughter they have claimed to kidnapped. A real kidnapping where the object is to get money for a child that has been taken would dwell very clearly on the exchange.

In this letter, the author says he or she will call tomorrow during a certain time frame but does not indicate what day of the week tomorrow is. That all depends on when the letter was written and when it was read by the parents. There's no date on the letter and I think a real kidnapper would try to make the money for a kid instructions very clear. Isn't that the purpose of a kidnapping?

No, the Ramseys knew they need to report their daughter missing, even though they knew she was dead and staged in the basement. A letter disguised as a ramsom note could do that along with making it seem the parents or any family member had anything to do with a dead body in the basement.

The letter which would serve as a cover had to be long, detailed and scary. This was not a kidnapping.

jmo

 

[UKGuy]

If they called friends and police, who they knew would search the house, isn't putting things in the WC the same as putting them in immediate public view?

Why would partially-opened holiday gifts raise questions? The presence of partially-opened holiday gifts around the winter holidays seems perfectly normal to me. What could they possibly have to do with a murder?

Your suggestion is the killers (possibly one of the Ramsey's) moved her body for a reason and the RN is simply a crude artifice to explain away why she was moved. If that is true, what is the real reason they moved her body?

If they called friends and police, who they knew would search the house, isn't putting things in the WC the same as putting them in immediate public view?

Only if they find them.

Why would partially-opened holiday gifts raise questions? The presence of partially-opened holiday gifts around the winter holidays seems perfectly normal to me. What could they possibly have to do with a murder?

Which planet do you post from? A gift tagged JonBenet, or a gift tagged Burke Ramsey, even a gift tagged Patricia Ramsey. Any observer might want to look beyond an abduction?

If that is true, what is the real reason they moved her body?

If you carefully examine the forensic evidence, instead of relying on logic, postmortem analysis etc, you will recognise there was minimally two staging events. So the R's without having to stand in front of anyone and say, we moved JonBenet from her bedroom to the basement, the ransom note stands in for that role. Its that simple, no need for a DocG conspiracy theory, its all good style americana pragmatism at work!

Someone in the R household woke up one morning to find JonBenet dead in bed, probably JR. JonBenet had already been staged, so whats to do? Leave well alone, dial 911, or move stuff around so to minimise any forensic liabilities?

This is why DocG's theory is obvious nonsense, its a theory about what might have taken place, not what happened. As such it sends people down the wrong road.


.

 

[Chrishope]

If they called friends and police, who they knew would search the house, isn't putting things in the WC the same as putting them in immediate public view?

Yes.

It's a fluke that the police checked the basement, but not the WC. It's a fluke that FW checked the WC but didn't see the body. But yes, to put her, and the other evidence, in the WC is to have her discovered.

Why would partially-opened holiday gifts raise questions? The presence of partially-opened holiday gifts around the winter holidays seems perfectly normal to me. What could they possibly have to do with a murder?

I'll let others answer that. Doesn't seem very important to me either, except of course the package of size 12 panties.

Your suggestion is the killers (possibly one of the Ramsey's) moved her body for a reason and the RN is simply a crude artifice to explain away why she was moved. If that is true, what is the real reason they moved her body?

It was one of the Ramseys, not an intruder.

The real reason for moving the body was exactly what it looks like - an attempt to keep it from being seen by another family member.

To move the forensic evidence from one room to another doesn't really do much as far as fooling the police- the killer is still left with a dead body, a blood stained nightgown, a white blanket, etc. Her room is still a mess too, and still has forensic evidence.

The RN is an attempt to set up a phoney kidnapping story, which in turn explains why the girl is (will be) missing. It doesn't explain why she's in the WC instead of her bed because there is no good reason for kidnappers to have moved her from her bed, to the WC, then kill her, then demand a ransom knowing that the body would likely be found before the ransom call was made.

The RN explains an abduction. But it only works if the body isn't found in the house. Once the body is found, the RN fails to explain anything. In fact, at that point, the RN rather obviously shows there was a plan to stage an abduction to cover up a murder.

 

[WhereAreTheyNow]

We've gone over the body/suitcase thing many times.

Thanks for the medical information, DD249. But at present we are not discussing whether the body was ever in the suitcase but rather the possibility that the suitcase may have played a part in the original planning.

@DD249: I guess that I have spent a hundred or so hours reading past threads here and FFJ - in many of them you contributed - and I am in awe of your medical knowledge. Please have patience with the newbies.